Irreplaceable UN: Protecting the Global Environment and the Commons

Abstract

Introduction

On June 26, 2026, the United Nations (UN) celebrated, in a somber way, 81 years of adoption and signing of the UN Charter¹ in San Francisco at the end (June 26, 1945) of the UN Conference on International Organization (UNCIO). In an address to the informal meeting of the UN General Assembly, the outgoing 9th Secretary-General Antonio Guterres aptly observed:

“The Charter was a promise to the world: That humanity can choose cooperation over chaos; law over lawlessness; dignity over domination; and hope over fear. A promise made from the ashes of war – and carried by every generation since. For eighty-one years, we have strived to keep that promise alive. Supporting peoples in their fight for self-determination and seating new nations as equals…The United Nations has never been perfect. But it is irreplaceable. Today, that promise is being tested to the breaking point…The nuclear shadow we swore to rub out, lengthening once more. International law invoked when convenient – and ignored when not. Inequalities and mistrust widening. A world where the rules apply only to some is not a world of order.”²

After 80 years³ of its existence, the direct role of the UN in the global protection of the environment and commons over the past 66 years (1960–2026),⁴ has been one of the most important contributions of the UN-led world order. The global problematique has been addressed by the three UN organs (UNGA, ECOSOC and the UNSC). Over the past many years, the UN Security Council has also sought to explore the link between “natural resources and insecurity”⁵ both as a thematic topic and in the context of country-specific or regional file.

“Tale of Two Crises” and Beyond

The above vividly came to the fore, in a special address at the London Climate Action Week, when the UNSG emphatically reiterated the “Tale of Two Crises” comprising a “climate crisis pushing us deeper toward higher temperatures and closer to catastrophic tipping points. And an energy crisis exposing the folly of a world hooked on hydrocarbons”.⁶ In the mold of Gandhian prognosis that “Earth has enough for everyone's need but not for anyone's greed”, the warnings of the UNSG pertain to dangers of crossing the planetary tipping points that could unleash an irreversible environmental change.

It appears that even as the UN faces an existential crisis being on the brink of financial bankruptcy due to budget squeeze, outstanding dues of UN members (2025 ended with a new record level of arrears of $1.6 billion)⁷ and withdrawal of the host country United States (January 07, 2026) from 31 UN entities (and 35 non-UN entities).⁸ This is notwithstanding the fact that payment of assessed contributions is a “legal obligation under the UN Charter for all Member States”⁹. The global environmental crisis alludes to the limits and “our planet's overall predicament”¹⁰ arising from an “outdated model of development”.¹¹ In fact, as early as 1908, Rabindranath Tagore, the Nobel Laureate (1913) had prophesized about this developmental model now alluded [June 26, 2026] by the 9th UNSG Guterres, wherein humans have created problems for themselves by chasing an illusive “progress” for which they now seek to find solutions:

“We have for over a century been dragged by the prosperous West behind its chariot, choked by the dust, deafened by the noise, and over-whelmed by the speed…If we ever ventured to ask, ‘progress towards what and progress for whom’, it was considered to be peculiarly and ridiculously Oriental to entertain such doubts about the absoluteness of progress”.¹²

It is the abovementioned predicament that now haunts the humanity even as the UNSG and entities of the UN System (WMO, UNEP, IPCC etc.) have been ringing the alarm bells. After the historic 1960 ‘decolonization’ resolution adopted by the UNGA, the States are far from taking effective common remedial actions to reverse the harmful “outdated model of development” [UNSG: June 26, 2026]. It remains a big challenge to address the root causes of environmental degradation and conserving our common natural heritage for the benefit of the present and future generations. Notwithstanding the fact that the UN-led World Order appears to be “caught in a turbulent tailspin”¹³ and perception that the “law of power is prevailing over the power of law”,¹⁴ the concerted efforts under the umbrella of UN80 Initiative¹⁵ as well as the Pact for the Future¹⁶ [as an outcome of the 2024 Summit of the Future], hold great salience to heed the call given on the 81st anniversary of adoption of the UN Charter (June 26, 1945), for “Better together. One Charter. One future”.¹⁷

Our search for ways and means of better integrating the specific concerns of the humanity, under established tenets of International Law and International Environmental Law, have revealed that sustainable development, common but differentiated responsibility and respective capability (CBDR&RC), equitable participation, and equitable sharing of benefits have still remained cherished goals at the altar of our quest for “progress” through an “outdated model of development”.¹⁸ In doing so, however, the humankind has to earmark its needs by jettisoning the greed of all kinds that now imperil the planet Earth. Our choices will help us to overcome our predicament and decide the future pathway.

Conclusion

The future trajectory of UN in the protection of the global environment and commons need to be seen in the above context. The implementation of the Pact for the Future [EPL 54 (4–6) 2024]¹⁹ for the future of the planet, as an outcome of the 2024 Summit of the Future,²⁰ remains a big challenge for the UN. This calls for an in-depth stocktaking with reference to role of the UN@81 for the protection of the global environment and commons as well as a look ahead amid funding crunch, withdrawals from environmental entities by the key member states and sidelining of the UN in the resolution of the global conflicts. The year-long election process including interactive dialogues²¹ for the 10th Secretary-General of the UN, has brought a renewed hope. With pronouncement by the UNSC President for the consideration of candidates in election process for the 10th UNSG [vide Article 97 of the UN Charter] wherein the UNSC will make a “recommendation” to the UNGA, has been slated for July 24–30, 2026.²² After an intensive interactive dialogue organized by the UNGA President during April 21–22, 2026,²³ the UNSC led process will further witness crystallization of the name of the UN's next chief administrative officer. Upon selection and assumption of charge on January 01, 2027, the 10th UNSG will need to walk into the formidable shoes of the 9th UNSG Antonio Guterres amid complex global challenges. It will determine as to how best the UN will be able to lead the way for protection of the global environment and commons at this critical juncture for the humanity and the planet. The Editor-in-Chief invites outstanding scholars from around the world to contribute their ideational solution oriented papers in this respect to the EPL as a contribution to the global knowledge pool.

EPL Special Issue on ICT Advisory Opinions on Climate Change

As a sequel to the EPL Issue 56 (1–2), this EPL Issue (3–4) comprises five scholarly contributions on the ICT Advisory Opinions on Climate Change (two) and other research articles (three) as follows:

PART I. ICT ADVISORY OPINIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE SPECIAL ISSUE: RESEARCH ARTICLES

(1) “Building a Corpus Iuris Climatis: Making Sense of the ICJ and the IACtHR Advisory Opinions on Climate Emergency” (Cecilia Silberberg): This article has uniquely placed under scanner two advisory opinions of the world court (ICJ) and the regional court (IACtHR) that have examined the complex interplay of global environment protection, protection of fundamental human rights and governance of global climate. Though the origin, content and focus of respective questions posed to both the judicial bodies were different, still they culled out some of the foundational principles of International Law such as due diligence, prevention, cooperation, and intergenerational equity. The article highlights significant roles played by scientific expertise in judicial interpretation. It also underscores the limits of legal imagination in addressing global climate crisis by the judicial bodies. As a corollary, the article opines that International Law has entered a new phase in an uncertain world.

(2) “A Rights Revolution in the Anthropocene: Reflections on the IACtHR Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency” (Verena Kahl and José Daniel Rodríguez Orúe): It has analyzed the IACtHR advisory opinion 32 (2025) that has deduced the standalone right to a healthy climate from the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment that has been regarded as a precondition for exercise of a variety of human rights as affirmed in the ICJ advisory opinion. The authors have considered nature and content of the right to a safe climate, including new right holders, duty bearers and corresponding obligations. Beyond the proposition of the IACtHR, they have suggested for corresponding opportunities for the right's further development in theory and practice including potential rise in rights-based climate litigation.

PART II. RESEARCH ARTICLES

(3) “Protection of Environmentally Displaced Persons: A Case for European Union Legislation” (Baya Amouri): The author has examined the contentious issue of asylum and the international legal framework for protection that remains largely silent on environment driven displacement. It asserts that in spite of growing number of people displaced by environmental factors, the European Union lacks a legally binding instrument to recognize and protect those forced to move due to environmental contingencies. On the basis of foundational instruments such as the Common European Asylum System, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, founding treaties of the EU, and corpus of international environmental and human rights law, the author has contended that there is a resulting protection gap, contrary to the EU's Treaty principles, its human rights obligations, its environmental commitments and calls for an appropriate EU legislation for the purpose.

(4) “In Search of a Global Approach to Air Pollution: Some Legal Reflections on the Role of the SDGs” (Yulia Yamineva): This article probes the growing menace of air pollution as a global problem especially in the context of lack of global instrument to address the challenge. It takes the perspective of the SDGs though the SDG framework do not offer a comprehensive approach to air pollution. The author's premise is that the SDGs could provide a way out since they resonate globally as a new normative framework in conjunction with viewing air pollution as a developmental concern and comprise globally applicable precise air quality targets and indicators. Thus, the SDGs could open up multi-stakeholder, multi-level cooperation for remedying air pollution as a global concern till 2030 and beyond under any successor framework.

(5) “Environmental Justice through Gender Sensitive Debt-for-Nature Swaps in the Caribbean: An SDG Policy Perspective” (Chi Yeung Lo): The controversial framework of debt-for-nature swaps has been mooted for long as a tool of environment protection and nature conservation. The author considers it having salience in the context of climatic changes amid mountains of debt burden especially for small island developing countries in the Caribbean. These countries have high vulnerability in view of high debt-to-GDP ratios and vulnerabilities like hurricanes and biodiversity loss. It examines the issue within the Schlosberg's EJ framework and gender-sensitive disaster risk financing strategies from the Caribbean Development Bank. The author has chosen to analyze women's disproportionate vulnerabilities in resource-dependent livelihoods. In contrast to the gender-blind metrics that risk perpetuating inequities in the Caribbean, the author opines that the debt-for-nature swap has expanded marine protected areas and supported livelihoods.

****